Suppr超能文献

利用两种方法从野生鸟类栖息地中检测环境中的抗菌药物抗性基因:一种是市售的无需培养的 qPCR 检测方法,另一种是培养指示菌然后进行全基因组测序。

Environmental antimicrobial resistance gene detection from wild bird habitats using two methods: A commercially available culture-independent qPCR assay and culture of indicator bacteria followed by whole-genome sequencing.

机构信息

Alaska Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey, Anchorage, Alaska.

Alaska Science Center, U.S. Geological Survey, Anchorage, Alaska.

出版信息

J Glob Antimicrob Resist. 2023 Jun;33:186-193. doi: 10.1016/j.jgar.2023.03.009. Epub 2023 Mar 25.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

A variety of methods have been developed to detect antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in different environments to better understand the evolution and dissemination of this public health threat. Comparisons of results generated using different AMR detection methods, such as quantitative PCR (qPCR) and whole-genome sequencing (WGS), are often imperfect, and few studies have analysed samples in parallel to evaluate differences. In this study, we compared bacterial culture and WGS to a culture-independent commercially available qPCR assay to evaluate the concordance between methods and the utility of each in answering research questions regarding the presence and epidemiology of AMR in wild bird habitats.

METHODS

We first assessed AMR gene detection using qPCR in 45 bacterial isolates from which we had existing WGS data. We then analysed 52 wild bird faecal samples and 9 spatiotemporally collected water samples using culture-independent qPCR and WGS of phenotypically resistant indicator bacterial isolates.

RESULTS

Overall concordance was strong between qPCR and WGS of bacterial isolates, although concordance differed among antibiotic classes. Analysis of wild bird faecal and water samples revealed that more samples were determined to be positive for AMR via qPCR than via culture and WGS of bacterial isolates, although qPCR did not detect AMR genes in two samples from which phenotypically resistant isolates were found.

CONCLUSIONS

Both qPCR and culture followed by sequencing may be effective approaches for characterising AMR genes harboured by wild birds, although data streams produced using these different tools may have advantages and disadvantages that should be considered given the application and sample matrix.

摘要

目的

已经开发了多种方法来检测不同环境中的抗菌药物耐药性(AMR),以便更好地了解这种公共卫生威胁的演变和传播。使用不同 AMR 检测方法(如定量 PCR(qPCR)和全基因组测序(WGS))生成的结果之间的比较往往并不完美,并且很少有研究同时分析样本以评估差异。在这项研究中,我们比较了细菌培养物和 WGS 与非培养依赖性商业可用 qPCR 检测方法,以评估方法之间的一致性以及每种方法在回答有关野生鸟类栖息地中 AMR 的存在和流行病学问题方面的效用。

方法

我们首先使用 qPCR 评估了 45 个细菌分离物中的 AMR 基因检测,这些分离物我们已经有了 WGS 数据。然后,我们使用非培养依赖性 qPCR 和 WGS 对 52 个野生鸟类粪便样本和 9 个时空收集的水样进行了分析,这些水样中包含表型耐药指示细菌分离物。

结果

尽管抗生素种类之间存在差异,但细菌分离物的 qPCR 和 WGS 之间的总体一致性很强。对野生鸟类粪便和水样的分析表明,通过 qPCR 确定为 AMR 阳性的样本比通过培养和细菌分离物的 WGS 确定的样本更多,尽管 qPCR 未在两个分离出表型耐药分离物的样本中检测到 AMR 基因。

结论

qPCR 和培养后测序可能是用于表征野生鸟类携带的 AMR 基因的有效方法,尽管使用这些不同工具产生的数据流可能具有优势和劣势,应根据应用和样本基质进行考虑。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验